Skip to main content

Full text of "Report of the American Humane Association on vivisection and dissection in schools"

See other formats




QP45 .Am3 Report of the Americ 



-sr tt 1 1t HT * J* >V ,r ,r *■ ;v -J- R- — •><- *- * At 

Report . .. un Vivisection 

and Dissection in Scnoois 



Columbia ©tttomitp 


College of ^fjpstctans; anb burgeons; 





Vivisection and Dissection 
in Schools 


The American Humane Association particularly 
desires that this Report may reach every teacher of 
physiology in the public and private schools of this 
country. Copies will be mailed prepaid on receipt of 
four cents^ in postage stamps, and twelve copies will be 
sent for forty cents. Address 

Dr. Albert Leffingwell, 

62 Kirkland Street, 

Cambridge, Mass. 


American Humane Association. 

Societies of the United States and Canada 


Prevention of Cruelty to Animals 
and Children. 

JOHN G. SHORTALL, President, 
560 Wabash Avenue, Chicago, 111. 

Dear Sir: 

Your attention may already have been called to the 
more or less public discussion concerning the effect 
upon our youth of those methods of instruction, obtain- 
ing to some extent in our public schools ( and we fear 
being urged to yet wider prevalence,) whereby the 
facts of physiology are set forth by means of actual 
experimentation upon living animals, etherized for 
that purpose. Animals, such as frogs, pigeons, dogs 
and particularly cats, are dissected before mixed 


classes of boys and girls, — sometimes the teacher 
operating, and sometimes the pupils. The American 
Humane Association, having had its attention very 
forcibly called to this matter, and realizing that public 
opi?iion must, at least e?icourage or discourage such meth- 
ods of instruction in our schools, earnestly desires to 
obtain the opinion of those who largely shape and 
guide the public thought. Will you therefore be kind 
enough to give us your judgment upon the following 
questions : 

i st. Will experiments involving either the infliction 
of pain or death upon helpless creatures tend to culti" 
vate or to blunt the natural sensibilities of children 
assisting thereat ? 

2nd. Do you think it advisable to give to children 
a belief in their irresponsible power over the lower 
forms of life ? 

3rd. Do you consider it in accord with the best 
interests of education that children be familiarized with 
the infliction upon animals of mortal wounds, with the 
sight of blood, or the process of dying ? 

4th. In the teaching of children in public schools 
of those rudimentary truths of physiology and hygiene 
which pertain to the care and preservation of health, 
could not everything needful be clearly taught by the 
use of illustrations and manikins, without resort to ex- 
periments on living creatures ? 

5th. If before advanced students it be sometimes 
deemed advisable to expose the vital organs of ani- 
mals already killed, would it not seem far preferable 


that such demonstrations be upon animals used for 
food, rather than upon those whose whole existence is 
associated with human companionship and affection? 

The American Humane Association is of the opin 
ion that not only vivisection and the killing of animals 
by and before children of public school age, but also 
their dissection, not only neutralizes much of the work 
its Constituent Societies have so long been laboring to 
accomplish, but that such practices must inevitably 
operate to the moral injury of the young, and the dull- 
ing of all those finer feelings so essential to the 
noblest types of manhood and womanhood. 

Believing that in view of the interest at stake, you 
will be willing to give this Association the benefit of 
your judgment, I am, sir, 

Respectfully yours, 

John G. Shortall, President. 

Rev. Francis H. Rowley, 
Albert Leffingwell, M. D., 

Special Committee. 


The committee to whom was intrusted the duty of 
receiving replies to the circular of the American 
Humane Association regarding dissection and vivisec- 
tion in public schools beg leave to submit the follow- 
ing report : 

Two letters of inquiry have been issued at an inter- 
val of several months. They were identical in effect 
except as regards the wording of the fifth question. 
For the sake of accuracy it is deemed best to call at- 
tention to this difference ; although it seems exceed- 
ingly improbable that the general character of replies 
to the first circular, as a whole, would have been 
essentially different had the second form of interro- 
gation only been used. 

This fifth interrogation of the first circular was as 
follows : 

" If before advanced students, it be sometimes 
deemed judicious to expose the vital organs or vital 
phenomena of creatures under anaesthetics, and killed 
while unconscious, would it not seem far preferable that 
these be upon animals used for food, than upon those 
whose whole existence is associated with human com- 
panionship and affection?" 

This implies the use of painless vivisection before 
advanced students ; and on further consideration that 


subject was deemed somewhat aside from the real 
purpose of these inquiries. In the second edition the 
question was changed so as to refer simply to the 
dissection of dead animals and the preferable study of 
the lungs and heart of a sheep or an ox, in place 
of animals generally used for pets, and specially 
put to death for purposes of dissection. It ran thus : 

" If before advanced students it be sometimes 
deemed advisable to expose the vital organs of animals 
already killed, would it nor seem far preferable that 
such demonstrations be upon animals used for food, — 
rather than upon those whose whole existence is asso- 
ciated with human companionship and affection?" 

Fully half of the replies received were made in mono- 
syllables directly upon the margin of the circular it- 
self. Others were accompanied by letters, — sometimes 
making slight distinctions ( particularly as to the age 
of the pupils when dissection might be allowed,) but 
expressing to a greater or less degree, agreement with 
the sentiment prevalent in the Association. 

In several instances the writers were very careful to 
disclaim any antipathy toward scientific vivisection in 
Medical Colleges, while strongly condemning its em- 
ployment in public and private schools. A few others, 
regarding the questions of the committee as an attack 
upon all vivisection, have presented the Association 
with arguments for its defense as a method of profes- 
sional instruction. If their replies are not herein 
quoted, it is because the writers apparently misappre- 
hended the subject of the present inquiry — the use of 


dissection and vivisection in public and private 

Answers were received to the first circular from the 
following persons : 

President David H. Cochran, Ph. D., LL. D., Poly- 
tech,7iic Institute, Brooklyn, N. Y. : 

" You are personally aware of my position in regard 
to vivisection for illustration. It has been forbidden 
in the Polytechnic Institute for many years, and no 
animal is permitted to be killed on the premises for 
illustrative purposes." 

President M. W. Stryker, D.D., LL. D., Hamilton 
College, N. Y. .- 

" While disclaiming the slightest ability to express a 
technical opinion, I will say from an ethical point of 
view that I do certainly sympathize with the consider- 
ations urged in your circular. I feel deeply that 
vivisection should be reduced to instances of absolute 
necessity, and that much of it, as practiced in the 
presence of those whom it teaches to neglect the 
rights of animals, is inevitably brutalizing." 

Prof. Thomas M. Cooley, LL. D., University of 
Michigan : 

" The whole business of vivisection of animals ought 
in my opinion to be brought to an end, except where 
it can be conducted under the supervision of experi- 
enced surgeons." 


President E. Benj. Andrews, D. D., LL. D., Brcnvn 

University, Providence, P. I. : 

" The subject is a delicate one. All experiments 
and operations in this department here, are guarded in 
the most careful manner ; no pain is permitted to be 
suffered by any creature, and no dissection goes on 
to which anyone could object." 

Prof. Selim Peabody, Late President University of 

Illinois : 

" In my opinion vivisection should be permitted 
only to such persons of advanced scientific culture and 
training as may wish to make it an instrument of re- 
search. . . . Vivisection should never be used merely for 
purposes of curiosity, or even for illustration. There 
is no place for it in any school below that which has 
immediately or secondarily a professional character 
and purpose. Least of all should vivisection be con- 
ducted in the presence of children, or persons of im- 
mature age, in grammar schools, high schools, and 

President James M. Taylor, D. D., Vassar College : 

" I do not think such a course in any way necessary 

or desirable within the limits of a general education." 

President James MacAlister, LL. D., Drexel Insti- 
tute, Philadelphia : 

" With reference to the experimentation upon living 
animals in connection with elementary instruction in 
physiology, I beg to say that, in my judgment, it is 
very undesirable. ... I quite agree with you that 


the manikin and other appliances available for the 
purpose of illustration are sufficient for the lower 
grades of instruction and that the use of dissection 
must operate in blunting the moral sensibilities of the 
young people." 

Prof. Edmund J. James, Ph. D., University of Penn- 
sylvania : 

" I regard such experiments as barbarous and calcu- 
lated to do far more harm, from an educational point 
of view, than they can possibly do good. Any dissection 
of live animals for the mere purpose of instruction is, 
in my opinion, not only inhuman, but highly un- 
pedagogical. The only possible condition in which 
vivisection can be justified, is when it is absolutely 
necessary to the actual carrying out of scientific inves- 
tigations. Any vivisection for mere purposes of illus- 
tration either in public schools or in medical schools 
ought to be prohibited by law. I can hardly trust my- 
self to express my feelings upon this subject." 

Prof. Geo. Wilton Field, Brown University, Provi- 
dence, P. I. : 
" It is not advisable to kill, dissect, or vivisect any of 

the red blooded animals in the presence of young 

children. Manikins preferable, otherwise alcoholic 


John T. Prince, Board of Education, West Newton, 

Mass. : 

" Vivisection has no place in our public schools, and 
ought not to be practiced there. ... As to killing 


animals before children, I quite agree with the views 
of your Association, but I cannot agree with it in its 
condemnation of dissection of animals. In the upper 
grades of the grammar schools and in all grades of 
the high school a knowledge of the structure of ani- 
mals should be gained and it cannot be gained by any 
means so well as by actual observation of the parts 
under the direction of a teacher." 
Prof. Geo. W. Atherton, Star College, Pa. : 

" It seems to me that the practice of either vivisection 
or dissection in the presence of children of the usual 
school age is not only unnecessary, in the grade and 
amount of instruction that can be given in the public 
schools, but is altogether injurious and inadmissible. 
Its advantages at that stage of instruction seem to me 
to be very slight, while the disadvantages and in- 
jurious results upon the habits of thought and feeling 
of the pupils seem to me so obvious that every right 
thinking person must revolt against it." 
Rev. Dr. C. W. Leffingwell, Editor " The Living 

Church" Chicago, III. Founder of St. Agnes School, 

Knoxville, III. : 

" Experiments involving pain or death of animals 
must blunt the sensibilities of young persons present ; 
it is not advisable to teach children that they have a 
right to deal with this mystery of life for such pur- 

" I think it most undesirable to familiarize the minds 
of the young with the sight of suffering and dying. 
Those whom it does not shock it will harden." 


There is no need of experimenting upon living crea- 
tures for the imparting of physiological truth ; every 
organ can be studied and dissected apart from the 
body from which it is taken, and without exhibition of 
the living animal or even of the dead one. It is un- 
necessary to take any animal, as a whole, for the pur- 
pose of instruction. Each part can be dissected 

Rev. Dr. Lyman Abbott, Pastor of Plymouth Church, 
Brooklyn. Editor of "The Outlook" New York City : 

"I am not sufficiently acquainted with the pros and 
cons in the matter of vivisection to express any valua- 
ble opinion upon the subject at large, but I should 
think it very clear that not only vivisection, but even 
the dissection of animals, carried on by or before 
children of public school age must do a great deal 
more harm than it can possibly do good." 

B. O. Flower, Editor of u The Arena" Boston, Mass. : 
" It is difficult to conceive of anything more in- 
jurious to the child than allowing it to witness or en- 
gage in experiments involving the infliction of pain or 
death upon helpless animals. It is bound to blunt the 
finer sensibilities and call out the savage in the 

" I am as unqualifiedly opposed to the familiarizing 
children with the infliction of pain or mortal wounds 
on animals as I am opposed to giving children military 
instruction in our schools. The child that becomes 
familiar with torturing dumb animals and the child 


who is familiarized with war, during the plastic years 
when his character is being formed, will necessarily 
be brutalized to a very great extent. I do not believe 
in vivisection. I believe that all experiments nec- 
essary have already been made. 

" Certainly there is no excuse whatever for using 
aught in the public schools beyond illustrations, mani- 
kins, etc." 
Hon. Arba N. Waterman, Judge oj Illinois Appellate 

Court, Chicago : 

"Civilization in its moral aspect consists in a 
heightened sympathy with, and consideration for, those 
men or animals in our power. It is impossible to 
train a child to indifference as regards the suffering of 
a helpless dog, and at the same time to be mindful of 
the rights of little children." 

Rev. O. B. Frothingham, Boston, Mass. : 

" I have no hesitation in expressing my hearty ap- 
proval of all the ideas contained in the circular you 
so kindly send me. Young people can get all the 
physiological instruction they need, and more, without 
hurting a single creature. It is a shame that they 
should be demoralized by experiments that inflict 
pain on the lower animals ; that they should regard 
these animals as victims of irresponsible power; that 
they should early be familiarized with blood, torture 
or death. If vivisection is necessary, a matter that I 
am not quite sure about, it should be confined to 
skilful physicians experimenting in laboratories, or 


lecturing to adults, and under conditions which in- 
sure the utmost benefit with the least possible tor- 
ment. If the human advantage is merely probable 
and the agony considerable, the advantage should be 
forborne. We have learned to wait for knowledge, 
while as to bearing p'ain, man, with his vast mental 
and moral resources, ought to be ashamed to confess 
inferiority to the dumb beasts." 

Rev. Dr. H. W. Thomas, Chicago, III. : 

" The practice of vivisection in the higher schools 
of our country, medical and other colleges, has been 
carried, to say the least, to the borders of abuse, and 
its introduction to the public schools should be dis- 
couraged and condemned by all who have the highest 
good of the rising generations at heart. It is not 
necessary for practical instruction in physiology, and 
if such lessons are needed, they should be taught from 
the forms of life taken for use as food. 

"In all young minds and hearts should be culti- 
vated a sacred reverence for life and the kindest feel- 
ings for every creature capable of suffering pain. 

"We should certainly hope that the humane senti- 
ments of our age will create a public feeling so 
strong as to discourage and prevent every form of 
cruelty and the shedding of blood in our public 

Rev. A. W. Stevens, Cambridge, Mass. : 

" No person, old or young, should inflict either 
wounds or death on any animal except in cases of 
clear necessity." 


Rev. N. Seaver, Jr., Millbury, Mass. : 

. . . " Stating the case broadly, I think that in- 
formation calculated to make children less humane 
is not profitable or even pardonable. Better more 
attention to the rudiments of education and fewer of 
the fads that are instructive and helpful, if at all, to 
but a very small minority of mature and scholarly 
minds. To permit children to witness what they 
must regard as torture is positively demoralizing. 
To fill their heads with scientific facts for which not 
one in a thousand will ever have a use, and then 
permit them to graduate from High School, spelling 
'separate' with one 'a,' is a piece with much other 
prevalent nonsense." 

Rev. Dr. R. A. White, Chicago, III.: 

" I fully and heartily concur in your efforts to stop 
the practice of vivisection or dissection of animals 
of any kind in the public schools. Vivisection under 
proper restrictions may be of sufficient value to medi- 
cal science when performed by medical experts to 
counterbalance its cruelties. But anything of the 
kind before public school pupils, not one in a thou- 
sand of whom will ever study or practice medicine, is 
absolutely unnecessary and without reason. It bru- 
talizes the children, subordinates in their estimation 
the rights of animals to life and reasonable human 
care, and is of no practical value beyond what could 
as well be obtained in other ways. Set me down as 
one who loves my fellow animals, and deprecates any 


unnecessary infliction of pain upon them, no less than 
that loss of fine feeling which inevitably follows on the 
part of children systematically trained to hold the suf- 
ferings of animals lightly." 

Rev. W. C. Gannett, Rochester, N. Y. : 

" If the custom of vivisection is entering our public 
schools, I rejoice that you are taking up the matter in 
this way. . . . Were a child of mine attending a 
private school where this practice was followed, I 
should feel that all good it might get in other ways 
would be largely offset by this cruelty, and should 
take the child away." 

Rev. Dr. Leslie W. Sprague, San Francisco, Cal. : 

" To inflict pain may not be the result of cruelty ; 
but it causes either deadened sensibilities, or a delight 
in seeing pain." 

Rev. A. J. Chapin, D. D., Omaha, Neb. : 

" I believe the business of dissection, and especially 
of vivisection as practiced in the public schools of all 
grades, to be wholly unnecessary and wrong, and am 
glad to use any influence which I may possess against 
the demoralizing practice." 

Rev. J. E. C. Welldon, D. D., Head Master Har- 
row School, England. : 
"I should say such experiments will undoubtedly 

blunt the sensibilities of children. Their power is not 

irresponsible, and they should certainly not be taught 

that it is." 


Profs. Ladd and Daniell, Chauncey Hall School, 
Boston, Mass. : 

" Without expressing any opinion in regard to what 
may be wise for college students, we disapprove very 
strongly of vivisection in grammar or high schools." 

Miss Florence Buck, Cleveland, O. : 

" I am in hearty sympathy with the effort of the 
Humane Association in this direction. For eight 
years I have been a teacher of physiology in the High 
School, and am convinced that both there and in lower 
grades, all that pertains to human physiology which 
comes within the scope of such instruction, may be 
taught from manikins and from organs of animals used 
for food. 

" I hope the Society will also protest against the ex- 
periment so frequently described in works on Physics, 
that of introducing a mouse under the receiver of an 
air-pump. To allow students to witness the dying 
struggles of a helpless creature is injurious to the 
finer sensibilities." 

Miss Lillian Freeman Clark, Boston, Mass. : 

" In my opinion, the sight of suffering in animals 
or human beings is only harmless to the bystander 
when his presence is necessary or desirable for the 
relief of the sufferer." 
Prof. J. H. Allen, Cambridge, Mass. : 

" My opinion is not that of an expert in the present 
methods of common school instruction ; but it is clear 
and decided on the following points : 


" 1. It is shocking and unpardonable that anything 
approaching or resembling vivisection should be per- 
mitted except in professional schools, and then only 
under the greatest precautions as to anaesthetics. 

"2. That any form of dissection of animal tissues 
is probably worse than useless as a basis of instruc- 
tion, except in special classes of the highest grade of 
public schools ; and for ail that can be profitably 
taught to the ordinary pupil, plates and models are 
preferable on every account, size, neatness, intelligi- 
bility and precision." 

Prof. William James, M. D., Harvard University. : 

" By such experiments I should apprehend no spe- 
cial effect in the way of either heightening or blunting 
the sensibilities of average children. There are ' psy- 
chopathic " children who might either receive a haunt- 
ing shock, or an impulse to cruelty, according to the 
bent of their weakness, from the sight of dissection, etc. 
" To the third question I reply ' no,' so far as child- 
ren below 16 or 17 are concerned. After that age the 
answer depends on the special circumstances. To 
have seen mortal wounds and death is often a vitally 
important experience. To be ' familiarized ' with them 
may be unfortunate. To be familiarized with blood, in 
the case of those whom it makes faint, means the 
overcoming of a most deleterious weakness. 

"At the high school age of 17 or 18, the sight of a 
dead animal dissected is for almost all boys a highly 
desirable experience, ministering to a most legitimate 
intellectual need. With a serious teacher, I see no 


possible harm, except to ' psychopathic ' subjects. I 
believe vivisection of any sort to be quite out of place 
in schools of any grade. 

" To college classes, vivisectional demonstration of the 
spinal reflexes on a decapitated frog, and exhibition of 
a frog and a pigeon painlessly deprived of their cere- 
bral hemispheres, are invaluable. Odier vivisections 
(a frog's nerve muscle preparation can hardly be called 
a vivisection) seem to me best omitted. 

" I believe that there goes on in medical schools a 
lot of purely wanton vivisection for purposes of ' de- 
monstration,' which the class does not see, and which 
is wasteful of life and condemnable. 

" I believe in keeping up a sore state of public opin- 
ion as to this latter sort of cruelty. . . . What is 
needed is a great public sense of the responsibility of 
our power of life and death over lower creatures. For 
this result as much as anything depends, it seems to 
me, on the example of the teacher's spirit." 
Prof. H. E. Summers, Professor of Physiology, Uni- 
versity of Illinois : 

" Children show little natural sensibility to pain 
inflicted on lower animals ; what they have can only be 
imparted to them by careful training. Hence the wit- 
nessing of the infliction of pain is decidedly harmful, 
as tending to prevent their acquisition of a proper 
degree of sensibility. . . . A fly may be killed cru- 
elly, a pet dog humanely. It is impossible, even if 
desirable, to prevent most children killing at least 
insects ; they should therefore be taught to do it 



humanely with full regard to the feelings of the smallest 
living creature. 

" Children should certainly not be given a belief in 
their irresponsible power ; of the power controlled by a 
great responsibility, yes. They will learn that they 
have the power despite us ; and the knowledge of 
responsibility should come with the knowledge of the 

Edwin D. Mead, Editor " New England Magazine : " 
" In reply to your circular concerning dissection and 
experimentation upon animals, in connection with the 
teaching of physiology in the schools, I would say that 
all such work should be done with great care and under 
the most scientific supervision. I cannot conceive 
of conditions which would ever make it necessary or 
useful in the lower grades of any schools." 

Prof. Bar, University of Gottingen, Germany : 

" I agree fully with the American Humane 
Association in the opinion that not only vivisection, but 
even dissection of animals, killed by and before child- 
ren of public school age, will inevitably operate to the 
moral injury of the young." 


Extracts from Replies to the Second 

His Eminence, Cardinal Gibbons, Baltimore, Md. : 

" In reply to questions addressed to me in the 
name of the American Humane Association, I beg to 
say that I am inclined to think such experiments as 
you mention tend to blunt the natural sensibilities of 
children assisting thereat. 

" The best interests of children, in my judgment, 
require that they be not familiarized with the sight of 
blood or death, inhumanly inflicted. 

" I am inclined to think that sufficient instruction 
could be imparted by the use of illustrations and man- 
ikins. I think it advisable to give children the knowl- 
edge as Scripture does, of the God-given power of 
man over the lower forms of life ; but they should be 
warned that this power is not absolute, arbitrary or 

Rt. Rev. Bishop Alfred Barry, Chaplain to Her 

Majesty, Windsor Castle, England: 

"I take it for granted that in the experiments re- 
ferred to effective anaesthetics are used, and there- 
fore that no cruel infliction of pain takes place. 

" But even in that case, I should think it most un- 
desirable to perform experiments on living animals 
before children just at the age at which experience 
proves that there is the greatest temptation to reck- 


lessness and cruelty. Even under anaesthetics there 
is often, as we know in human subjects, the appear- 
ance of struggle and suffering, which should be in 
itself offensive to a sensitive temper, and the desire 
of imitation, so characteristic of growing boys, is not 
unlikely to lead to the repetition of the experiments 
without anaesthetics. I cannot believe that for such 
physiological and hygienic teaching as is suitable to 
children, vivisection can be necessary. There are 
many things not wrong in themselves which we should 
keep from children to whom " maxima debetur rever- 
ential and vivisection is one of them." 

Rt. Rev. Geo. F. Seymour, LL. D., Bishop of Spring- 
field, III. : 

" In response to your inquiries, I would say, with- 
out any qualification, that the American Humane 
Association is right in the position which it takes as 
expressed by your questions. 

" To reverse the policy of taking thought and sym- 
pathy for others, and particularly for creatures which 
cannot protect themselves and have no laws to shelter 
them, is most pernicious, in my judgment, in its effects 
upon the young, and the result must be most disas- 
trous upon character. The plea for such atrocities 
will not bear serious consideration. All the knowl- 
edge of the economies of life needed by the ordi- 
nary man or woman can be readily obtained from 
illustrated works on the subject of physiology within 
the reach of all." 


Rt. Rev. Francis M. Whittle, LL. D., Bishop of 

Virginia : 

" Such experiments I think must most decidedly 
blunt and destroy the sensibilities of children." 
Rt. Rev. William Andrew Leonard, Bishop of 

Ohio : 

" Objective lessons in pain must necessarily deaden 
and dull the sensibilities of boys and girls. 

" Children should be taught kindness and gentle- 
ness towards God's creatures ; they should realize 
their responsibility to hurt nothing. 

" The sight of blood and physical agony should not 
be allowed to children. In Connecticut, I believe, 
no butcher may sit as a juryman in a murder case, 
and the law is doubtless based on this principle. 

" Undoubtedly children can be taught all that it is 
necessary for them to learn of physiology and hy- 
giene by illustrated books, manikins, etc. Indeed, I 
am shocked to learn that vivisection is practiced in 
our public schools. If it be so, then our public school 
system needs renovation and reformation of a very 
vigorous character in this direction. Our schools are 
not halls of dissection, nor do we pay our school 
taxes in order to develop public education into higher 
education. I am sure that multitudes of right minded 
citizens of all degrees and all opinions will rally to 
your support." 

Rt. Rev. Cortlandt Whitehead, Bishop of Pitts- 
burgh, Pa. : 
" I very heartily and sincerely add my protest 


against such methods as those mentioned in your cir- 

" To my mind it is absurd and fanatic to make use 
of any such methods with children of public school 
age, and I have no sympathy whatever with those 
who would advocate them. ... So far from 
being in accord with the best interests of education, I 
think that such instruction will ultimately be of great 
injury, not only to the children themselves but to 
society in general." 

Rt. Rev. Thomas A. Starkey, Bishop of Newark : 

" In my judgment it is of the greatest importance 
that all children, boys especially, be taught carefully 
and with painstaking, humanity to animals. It is 
more than important, it is vitally necessary. Chil- 
dren are apt to be thoughtless ; boys are often so to 
the verge of cruelty. Any exhibition, therefore, which 
is deliberately prepared and with such experiments as 
you describe, must, in my opinion, have the effect of 
encouraging this native insensibility. We may easily 
pay too dear for knowledge, and whatever benefits 
may accrue in the way of added knowledge from such 
methods of instruction as those you refer to, is dearly 
purchased by the loss of so great an element in Chris- 
tian character as humanity ; the chivalric feeling of 
the strong for the helpless and weak." 

Rt. Rev. John Scarborough, Bishop of New Jersey : 

" I am entirely opposed to vivisection, whether in 

schools or in medical colleges, as a barbarous and 


cruel thing, unnecessary and brutalizing in its tenden- 
cies, and utterly without excuse." 

Rt. Rev. David S. Tuttle, Bishop of Missouri : 

" I have no hesitation in saying that in my opinion 
the practice of vivisection, or anything approaching to 
it, in the infliction of pain upon the lower animal crea- 
tion, as a means of education of our children in the 
public schools, is much to be deplored, and should be 
resisted by all who have at heart the good of the race 
and the nation." 

Rt. Rev. A. Cleveland Coxe, Bishop of Western Neiu 
York : 

" I am shocked even to read the inquiries contained 
in your circular, and I cannot but add my name under 
the conviction that such abuses are as horrible in view 
of their effect on the young as they are in view of the 
tortures inflicted on the brutes." 

Rt. Rev. W. C. Doane, LL.D., Bishop of Albany, N. Y.: 

"I do not believe the effect upon children of wit- 
nessing experiments upon living animals can possibly 
be good. It must either shock their sensibilities if 
they are what they ought to be, or tend to encourage 
them in cruelty if they have that unnatural strain in 
them. It seems to me that physiology can be taught 
and ought to be taught without such experiments, but 
I beg leave in saying this, that I am not opposed to 
vivisection, when it is conducted under the restraints 
of proper regulations." 


Rt. Rev. N. S. Rulison, Assistant Bishop Central 

Pennsylva7iia : 

" In my judgment vivisection and the killing of ani- 
mals by and before children attending the public 
schools, and also the dissection of animals under simi- 
lar circumstances are practices which cannot be really 
necessary and which most inevitably blunt the sensi- 
bilities and corrupt the character of the young. Prac- 
tices so abhorent to the finest feelings and injurious to 
the best character should be suppressed by society." 

Rt. Rev. Thomas Clark, Bishop of Rhode Island : 
" I was not aware that any such atrocity existed, as 

the introduction of vivisection into our ordinary 

schools, and I think that it ought to be forbidden by 


" If physiology cannot be taught our children by the 

use of manikins and illustrations, it will be well not to 

teach it at all. ... I am not sure that operating 

on the living subject is ever justifiable." 

Rt. Rev. Henry Adams Neely, Bishop of Maine: 

" In regard to the practice of vivisection in the 
presence of school children, let me say in one word 
that I am utterly opposed to it." 

Rt. Rev. John Williams, LL.D., Bishop of Connecticut : 

" Without entering especially into particulars, I am 
quite ready to say that in my view, any and all vivi- 
section and killing of animals before children of pub- 
lic school age, and also their dissection, cannot but be 


most injurious to such children and ought to be 
entirely discouraged." 

Rt. Rev. Charles H. Fowler, Bishop M. E. Church, 

Mimieapolis : 

" Cruelty is a sign of barbarism. Vivisec- 
tion engenders cruelty or indifference to suffering. 
Therefore it reverses the order of the refining forces 
of civilization." 

Rev. Dr. Morgan Dix, D. C. L., Rector of Trinity 

Church, New York : 

" 1 was not aware until I read your article and the 
circular of the Association that the method of instruc- 
tion to which they refer had been introduced into 
our schools. Yet I cannot say that I am surprised at 
this latest development of the exaggerated and fan- 
tastic spirit of our times. 

" The system of education of the young appears to 
need a fundamental reform, and it is perhaps fortu- 
nate that fads of this kind should be introduced as 
rapidly as possible, in order that the need of such a 
general and rational overhauling in the interests of 
much abused childhood may become more thoroughly 
evident to the general view. . . . I am sure that 
vivisection should be prohibited under severe penalty, 
except when performed by professional men licensed 
to practice it for undoubtedly sufficient reasons. As 
to the dissection of animals before mixed classes of 
boys and girls as a part of the curriculum of instruc- 
tion in our common schools, I fail to see any justifica- 


tion for it. Children need to be taught lessons of 
kindness and consideration for the creatures which 
we domesticate and of which they make pets and com- 

" It is not necessary that the average boy or girl 
should be made an expert in anatomy, physiology or 
biology. Such studies are only appropriate for those 
intended for the degrees in surgery and medicine. 
I feel certain that all that is necessary for the time 
can be accomplished by models and illustrations, and 
that there can be no need of a display of ether, 
knives, blood, wounds and death. 

" Upon the whole, I confess to amazement at the 
infatuation of those, whoever they may be, who have 
introduced, or deem it wise to introduce, such methods 
into an already overloaded system of education, and 
I deprecate with all earnestness the mischief likely to 
ensue from so wide a departure from the principles 
and modes of sober common sense and useful 

" I trust that through the efforts of your Society the 
public may be awakened to a sense of the harm and 
wrong done to the rising generation, and that wise 
counsels will prevail over these latest outbursts of a 
well-intentioned but as I think most mischievous 

Rev. Dr. David H. Greer, St. Bartholomew's Church, 

New York: 

" I think it is not wise to introduce vivisection into 
the public schools. It is, in my opinion, for children 


an unnatural and pernicious method of instruction, 
calculated to do more harm than good." 
Rev. Dr. Henry Van Dyke, Pastor Brick Presby- 
terian Church, Fifth Ave., New York City : 
" I have no hesitation in expressing my opinion 
that the practice of vivisection in our public schools 
as a method of instructing boys and girls in physiol- 
ogy, is simply monstrous. . . 

" There is no reason in the world why our common 
schools should teach physiology at all, except in its 
most elementary form. Children do not need to have 
all the reasons for keeping the skin clean explained 
to them. They need only to be told that they must 
wash in order to keep well. And then, if they go 
dirty, a little judicious chastisement will be more 
effective than a hundred "lessons in physiology." To 
try to teach boys and girls all about their gastric juice 
and lymphatic glands in the common schools, is to 
waste the taxpayers' money and increase the mass of 
half-knowledge which is so much more dangerous than 
plain, unassuming, modest ignorance." 
Rev. Dr. Wm. N. McVickar, Philadelphia : 

" I deeply sympathize in every effort which is being 
made to abolish the wrong which vivisection is com- 
miting, not only on its dumb victims, but as well upon 
those who in any way participate in its inflictions." 
Rev. Dr. John Hall, New York City : 

" It is not needful to enter into details ; it is enough 
to say that I disapprove of such processes as your cir- 
cular describes, and for the reasons suggested." 


Rev. Frederick R. Marvin, M. D., Great Barrington, 

Mass. : 

"Though now a minister of the Gospel, I was edu- 
cated to the profession of medicine and was graduated 
from the college of physicians and surgeons, ' Medi- 
cal Department of Columbia College, N. Y.,' in 1870. 

" In the class-room I saw vivisections so unquali- 
fiedly cruel that even now, they remain in my memory 
as a nightmare. I am persuaded that none of the so- 
called experiments upon living animals that I witnessed 
were of any real value to me or to my fellow students. 

" I make, therefore, one inclusive answer to your 
five questions and say that vivisection is seldom if ever 
justifiable, and is never to be tolerated in a public lec- 
ture or in the presence of the young, who are almost 
sure to be brutalized thereby." 

Rev. Dr. Arthur Brooks, New York : 

" I am very thoroughly in sympathy with every effort 
to preserve unharmed the delicacy of feeling which 
belongs naturally to the young, and I do not believe 
that any of the educational methods call for practices 
which would lead to an opposite result. I cannot 
think that any knowledge which is gained by as great 
a sacrifice as the loss of tenderness and pity, is valu- 
able to the pupils in our public schools." 

Rev. Dr. Thomas A. Nelson, Brooklyn, N. Y. : 

"The result of vivisection before the eyes and 
minds of immature school children does little more 
than gratify a morbid and cruel curiosity. It leaves 


behind a miserably small increment of knowledge to 
compensate for the irreparable injury to those finer 
instincts and sympathies which are the patent of our 
nobility as man, and which lift us above the level of 
that inferior life, so often needlessly tortured to gratify 
a simulated passion for knowledge." 
Rev. E. E. Gordon, Sioux City, la. : 

" Thirteen years experience in teaching before I 
became a minister and all my work with young people 
since that time convince me that experiments involv- 
ing the infliction of pain or death upon animals do 
tend to blunt the natural sensibilities of children who 
have anything to do with them. Emphasis should be 
placed upon the sacredness of all life." 

Rev James O. S. Huntington, Holy Cross House, 
Westminster, Md. : 

" History makes it quite clear that such experi- 
ments will tend to blunt the sensibilities. Education 
means not merely crowding facts into a child but 
making him more humcme.' 1 '' 

Rev Dr. Charles H. Smith, Buffalo, N. Y. : 

" I am very glad the Society is taking up this ques- 
tion with earnestness, for this is one of the subtle 
ways in which the evil one is now seeking to harden 
the children's hearts and take away that feeling of 
kindness and sympathy which goes far to make the 
man and the Christian. We have got beyond the 
stage of brutal cruelty, if I may so term it. There 
is no risk now in undertaking to protect animals 


against the cruelty of the heartless driver. A word is 
all that is necessary. We can all remember, and it 
was not so very long either, when to take the part of 
the animal exposed one to the profane and vulgar 
rejoinder, if not to physical danger, from inhuman 
beings. Now the Society's work must be to prevent 
this subtler form of cruelty, which is carried on under 
the guise of educational advantage. It seems to me 
that teachers who advocate experiments of this kind 
only desire to iiiterest the children. There is a kind of 
morbid desire they cater to, without taking into con- 
sideration the terrible effect upon the learners." 
Rev. Dr. George C. Yeisley, Hudsoit, N. Y. : 

" There is no need for the torture of living animals 
to teach children the rudimentary truths of physi- 
ology, and even if there were, the knowledge would 
be dearly bought at the expense of the moral health 
of the pupils." 

Rey: Dr. B. F, DeCosta, St. John the Evangelist 
Church : 

" I agree entirely with the American Humane 
Association on the subject contained in this circular. 
The practices alluded to are brutal and demoralizing 
and against the best interests of humanity." 

Rev. Walker Gwynne, Summit, N. J. : 

" I had no idea that anywhere in any country, 
much less in this one, were public schools made the 
scene of such brutalizing experiments as the dissec- 
tion of living — even if etherized — animals. I gladly 


endorse the protest of your Society against this prac- 

Rev. Dr. Andrew W, Archibald, Hyde Park, 

Mass. : 

" My boys would be withdrawn from any school 
where there was opportunity offered to see living crea- 
tures dissected for the sake of illustrating facts in the 
structure of animal life. My whole nature revolts 
against such realism in educational methods." 

Rev. Henry Bassett, Providence, R. I. : 

" I firmly believe that the exhibition of animal suf- 
fering, whether inflicted under the guise of scientific 
information or not, is brutalizing in its tendency and 
does beyond question blunt the finer sensibilities of 
those engaged in the practice whether they be chil- 
dren or those of mature years." 

Rev. Geo. K. Hoover, D. D., Chicago, III.: 

" The infliction of pain or death upon a helpless 
creature will most certainly pervert the moral nature 
of children. Time was when people could lead a 
victim to the stake and witness his agony with com- 
parative complacency, but a great many customs that 
once were not only tolerated, but readily accepted, are 
now utterly banished from society." 

Rev. Dr. Herrick Johnson, Chicago, III.: 

"The opinion of the American Humane Associa- 
tion is my opinion." 


Pres't Ambrose C. Smith, D. D., Parsons College, 

Fairfield, Iowa : 

" While not opposed to vivisection. . . . yet it 
ought not to be left to the caprice of every experimenter. 
To let every tyro torture animals in the name of 
science, and to exhibit such experiments to school 
children is, in my opinion, revolting and outrageous." 

Rev. Dr. A. S. Freeman, Haverstraw, N. Y. (Pastor 

here for forty-eight years) : 

" I am fully in accord with the object designed to 
T)e secured by the American Humane Association." 

Rev. Frederick E. Dewhurst, Indianapolis, Ind. : 

" Keep the scalpel out of the hands of children, 
and give them Wordsworth and John Burroughs to 

Rev. Charles A. Northrup, Norwich, Conn. : 

" I am heartily in sympathy with the object you are 
seeking to attain, viz. : a public opinion averse to 
such methods of instruction." 

Prof. Felix Adler, " Society for Ethical Culture, 

New York City : 

"With the spirit and purpose of the questions con- 
tained in the circular of the American Humane Asso- 
ciation, I sympathize entirely, with one exception. 
The dissection of animals after death, if undertaken 
for the purpose of scientific study and for the attain- 
ment of knowledge not otherwise attainable, does not 
appear to me likely to operate to the moral injury of 


the young and the dulling of their finer feelings. In 
elementary schools it will be necessary to resort to 
this practice frequently, and if the teacher approaches 
the subject in the right spirit, I should apprehend no 
evil results." 

W. W. Story, Rome, Italy: 

"I have no hesitation in saying in reply to the first 
three questions, distinctly ' No,' and to the last two 
questions to answer as decidedly, ' Yes.' 

" All the facts of physiology which are needful or 
appropriate to be learned by children, can in my 
opinion be sufficiently taught by means of diagrams, 
models, and drawings with explanations by the 
teacher without recourse to the dissection of dead or 
living animals. 

"The latter course would, I think, naturally tend to 
blunt their sensibilities, to render them callous to suf- 
fering, and to induce them to tamper with Life, out of 
an excited and unhealthy curiosity without any corre- 
sponding benefit." 

Frederic Harrison, Esq., London, Eng. : 

" I am surprised and shocked to learn that there 
can exist schools of any kind where young boys and 
girls are allowed to witness dissection of living ani- 
mals under any circumstances whatsoever. I will not 
enter on the deep problem of vivisection as a means 
of research, nor do I concern myself with the various 
modes of producing total or partial insensibility. 

" Men may differ as to the lawfulness or value of 


acutely painful experiments on living animals, when 
conducted by highly trained men of science in pursuit 
of a definite scientific problem of great utility to the 
Jiuman race. And it is possible to differ as to the 
degree and efficiency of various anaesthetics. 

" But I should have thought that all persons of 
decent feeling and of practical experience of the 
young must be agreed on the depraving effect of 
accustoming boys and girls to see death inflicted, to 
witness organic operations, and to find that the 
ghastly incidents of the surgical and the dissecting 
table are part of their manuals of education. 

I can imagine nothing more certain to blunt their 
sense of humanity, and to surround their intellectual 
life with degrading association. 

" Those who are parents or moral teachers know how 
difficult it is to extirpate the love of cruelty to which 
so many children are prone. But for their teachers 
to familiarize them with cruelty as part of their train- 
ing, is a strange perversion of the moral sense. 

" I care not whether the anaesthetics are adequate or 
whether the dissection is of dead animals — both are 
revolting and deeply demoralizing for children. And the 
enormity is increased where the animals dissected are 
the companions of our daily life. 

"Auguste Comte, who was a philosopher as well as 

professor of science, taught us that the domestic 

•brutes we train to our service are in a sense admitted 

to our humanity. And he would not have the highest 

moral teachers of the young defile themselves with the 


dissection even of the dead. He thought this was 
incompatible with the profoundest sense of reverence 
for human life. 

" I write as a parent and teacher of long standing, 
who has followed courses of philosophy of many emi- 
nent men, and who has practical experience of bio- 
logical experiments." 

Miss Frances E. Willard, President, and Lady 
Henry Somerset, Vice-President, of the " World's 
Woman's Christian Temperance Union," have given 
the following answers to the questions propounded by 
the American Humane Association, in regard to the 
experimentation upon living animals in the teaching 
of physiology in the public schools. 

i st. In our judgment it must in the nature of the 
case blunt rather than cultivate the natural sensibili- 
ties of children. 

2d. The exact opposite is what we believe it is the 
duty of the teachers of children to inculcate. 

3d. We consider it a distinct damage to any child 
who witnesses such operations. 

4th. It is our earnest belief that in view of all the 
harm that must result from the teaching of vivisection 
in the public schools, the total results will be incalcu- 
lably more valuable if teachers would pursue the 
method you recommend. 

5 th. By all means. 
Ernest Bell, M. A., Lo?idon, England: 

" 1 have received your circular telling of certain 
methods of instruction used in schools, and have duly 
laid it before the members of the committee of the 


Humanitarian League, who request me to say that in 
your efforts to check the increasingly prevalent 
methods of teaching physiology through demonstra- 
tions upon living animals, you have their unqualified 
approval and hearty sympathy. 

' The man who has the most pity is the best man ; 
is the one most disposed to all social virtues, to 
nobleness of every sort. He who awakens our com- 
passion makes us better and more virtuous,' said Less- 
ing, the great critic ; and we may add that he who 
deadens our pity makes us lower and less virtuous." 

Rt. Hon. James Stansfeld, M. P., London : 

" I entirely agree with the views of the American 
Humane Association as expressed in their circular." 

Hon. George W. E. Russell, M. P., London : 

" I have the deepest dislike and distrust of all 
experiments on living creatures. To practice such 
experiments before children and young people is in 
my judgment to give systematic training in brutality. 

" The organized destruction of natural feeling is 
producing its certain results, and I have little doubt 
that experiments not distinguishable from human 
vivisection are now of frequent occurrence in hos- 
pitals. I wish you all success in your attempt to crush 
this brutal wrong." 

Leslie Stephen, Esq., London, England.: 

"I am most strongly of the opinion that children 
should be encouraged in every way to be kind to 
animals; few practical lessons in morality can, I 


should judge, be more useful. The dissection of 
living animals before children appears to be a very- 
doubtful way of impressing such lessons upon them." 
Dr. George Ebers, Munich, Bavaria: 

" The inquiry to the Humane Asssociation I beg to 
answer as follows : — 

"i. Vivisection is an aid to science, the practice 
of which, if pursued for earnest scientific research, 
should not be hindered. On the other hand, experi- 
ments which cause pain and even death to helpless 
creatures, when made in the presence of children in 
schools, I consider not only useless, but frivolous and 
harmful as well. 

. " The parent who wishes to see its offspring have a 
loving heart will teach it above everything to abhor 
all cruelty to animals which may be in its power. 

" 2. The child knows its power over dumb creatures 
only too well. To strengthen this knowledge would 
be useless and injurious, for the child should be 
taught to respect all living objects and to remember 
that they were created to enjoy life. I would add that 
plants should be included in the above. A child that 
will pick a beautiful flower from a bush and trample 
upon it, I think has not a good heart, and I know has 
been badly brought up. A child that will torture an 
animal for amusement lacks character. 

"3. The educator who wishes to familiarize the 
pupil with the sight of blood and the act of dying of 
animals could with more justice burn and cut the 
child so as to accustom it to pain, for then the body 


alone would suffer, and not also the soul. There are 
things which, to become accustomed to, blunt the 
finer sensibilities and lower the morals, and to these 
things belong, foremost, the solemn act of dying, or 
passing away of living beings. Should the child 
become so hardened and be able to witness the tor- 
ture and death of animals, it will, when grown up, and 
having charge of the fate of human beings, be tyran- 
nical and cruel." 

Hon. Andrew D. White, LL. D., Minister to Rus- 
sia, late President of Cornell University, N. Y. : 

" While I acknowledge that, under very careful 
restrictions, vivisection may be allowed to men whose 
character and eminence in appropriate professions 
give guarantees that their work will be as humanely 
done as possible and to the best ends, I am utterly 
and totally opposed to the loose permission to children 
and youth, and, indeed, to older persons not within 
the category above referred to." . . . "In my 
opinion, experiments involving either the infliction of 
pain or death upon helpless animals in the presence 
of children should be discouraged." 

William Dean Howells, New York: 

" Vivisection can only be justified in the cause of 
Science ; and though the children's subjects are ether- 
ized and suffer no pain, they lose their " little lives " 
for the sake of imparting a little learning, as useless a 
knowledge, as vain as any under the sun. Children 
are shielded by their innocence from many evils ; but 


I should think such lessons must tend to make them 
hard and cruel. The whole notion of such instruc- 
tion is detestable." 
Prof. Daniel G. Brinton, M. D., University of 

Pennsylvania : 

" I believe that physiology can be taught in no 
other way so successfully as by demonstration on the 
living subject, and as you and I learned it as physi- 
cians in that way, I think that we can both answer 
that our " natural sensibilities " were not blunted. 

" I certainly think that children and every one 
ought to be familiarized with the sight of blood, the 
pangs of disease, and the solemn event of dying. 
Death and pain should not be concealed ; they are 
the greatest of all educators ; for they alone teach us 
the value of life in its highest measure. 

" The whole tone of your circular is, in my opinion 
(which you have done me the honor to ask), contrary 
to the spirit of true education." 
Martin Kellogg, A. M., President of the University 

of California : 

" Everything needful can be almost entirely taught 
by use of illustrations or manikins." 
Nathan Green, LL. D., Chancellor Cumberland Uni- 
versity, Tennessee : 

" I am unalterably opposed to the dissection of ani- 
mals such as cats, dogs, etc., before children. The 
whole business of vivisection is of questionable pro- 
priety, and this practice before children for the pur- 
pose of instruction is simply barbarous." 


President George Williamson Smith, D.D. LL. D. 

Trmity College, Hartford : 

" The killing of animals by and before children of 
public school age, under the plea of instruction in 
physiology, I am persuaded is unnecessary." 
W. J. Holland, Chancellor Western University of 

Pemisylvania : 

' 'As the head of a university, in which the biologi- 
cal sciences and medicine hold a prominent place, I 
desire to say that in my judgment there is no neces- 
sity whatever of familiarizing children of school age 
with the phenomena of death, or with those vital 
phenomena which are best illustrated by vivisection ; 
and I question whether in the case of advanced stu- 
dents, except in special cases, which are of necessity 
very rare, vivisection should be resorted to." 

William T. Harris, A. M., LL. D., Commissioner of 

Education, United States : 

" I am glad to learn of some movement against a 
practice too widely extended of dissecting animals 
before the children in the elementary schools. I 
think it well-nigh useless, as far as teaching children 
a knowledge of anatomy is concerned, and at the same 
time very injurious to their moral and aesthetic feel- 
ings (especially the latter), even when there is no 
cruelty involved. 

" In the high school or academy I think perhaps 
physiological lessons may be illustrated by the dissec- 
tion of animals to some extent, but for elementary 
schools the practice is strongly objectionable." 


President William M. Blackburn, A. M., D. D., 

Pierre University, Dakota : 

" In my opinion an exaggerated value has been 
placed upon the study of physiology in the lower 
grades of our public schools. 

" The health lessons and those on temperance do 
not seem dependent upon physiology when pupils are 
not capable of the scientific appreciation of the sub- 
ject. I have doubts whether physiology in any really 
scientific form or method, i. e., as a science, has been 
of any very practical benefit in the public schools 
below the high school grades,' 1 

President J. W. Bissell, D. D., Upper Iowa Uni- 
versity : 

" I am fully in sympathy with your efforts to bring 
about a reformation in our present methods of teach- 
ing by vivisection and dissection." 

President Edward D. Eaton, D. D., LL. D., Beloit 

College, Beloit, Wis. : 

" I fully agree with the American Humane Society as 
to the needlessness and injurious tendencies of the 
vivisection and even the dissection of animals by and 
before children of public school age." 
James E. Rhoads, LL. D., President Bryn Mawr 

College, Bry?i Mawr, Pa. : 

" If by ' children ' is meant persons so young that 
they cannot be expected to appreciate the serious 
nature of such experiments, the effect will be to blunt 
their sensibilities. Such ' children ' should never see 
such experiments. 


" If by ' children ' be meant those legally so called ? 
yet from eighteen to twenty-one years of age, these 
may witness such experiments provided the experi- 
ments are not simply for class instruction but con- 
ducted by competent investigators for serious ends. 
No vivisection in any form should be used for such 
class instruction as is given in public schools or high 
President W. H. Payne, Ph. D., LL. D., U?iiversity 

of Nashville, Tenn. : 

" Personally and on deep conviction, I am opposed 
to vivisection as practiced in ordinary schools. It is 
a needless sacrifice of animal life -and has a direct 
tendency to blunt and pervert the finer instincts and 
feelings of children." 

President A. Owen, D. D., " Roger Williams Uni- 
versity" Nashville, Tenn, : 

" Whatever dulls the sensations to the suffering of 
creatures capable of suffering is in every way harmful 
to those qualities which most need cultivation and are 
most likely to receive it. Too much knowledge of the 
system is hurtful. The body is best served by general 
obedience to the laws of health and the cultivation of 
noble and worthy sentiments." 
President James W. Strong, D. D., Carlton College, 

Northfield, Minn. : 

" Vivisection is unnecessary and barbarous and 
nothing of the kind is allowed in connection with our 


President J. Braden, D. D., Central Tennessee Col- 
lege : 

" There is cruelty enough in our land at present. 
Life is held at too light a value by the great majority 
of our people." 

R. O. Beard, M. D., Professor of Physiology, Univer- 
sity of Minnesota : 

" To your questions I would make the following 
answers in order : I think that such experiments as 
are referred to are likely to blunt the natural sensibili- 
ties of children, since their judgment of utility is not 
educated sufficiently to act independently of emotion 
excited by the sight of suffering or death. As these 
emotions are not susceptible of observation or con- 
trol, they are likely to be destroyed by such influences. 
In the teaching of children in public schools of the 
rudimentary truths of physiology and hygiene, every- 
thing necessary can be taught by illustrations, mani- 
kins, models, and specimens removed from dead ani- 

" I appreciate the conservative character of your 
circular, the more so since it compares favorably with 
the extreme utterances of anti-vivisection societies. 
I believe in the utility and morality of vivisection 
under suitable restriction in scientific schools, but I 
believe also that the practice needs regulation. In 
public schools I think it both undesirable and 


Rev. J. Percival, D. D., Head Master Rugby School, 


" I am surprised to hear that the method of instruc- 
tion by means of experiment on living animals is in 
any degree tolerated in the United States. Happily 
we are free from it in England." 
Prof. Samuel Hart, Trinity College, Hartford: 

" I find myself entirely in agreement with the prin- 
ciples and practices which the American Humane 
Association maintains. I hope that its advocacy may 
have a strong influence on public opinion in a practi- 
cal way." 
Edward N. Packard, Syracuse, N. Y. : 

" I have very decided opinions about the matter, 
and am strongly opposed to a practice which seems to 
be prevailing to some extent in our cities. My atten- 
tion was called to it in this city, and our Ministerial 
Association in a private way sent me to learn about 
the practice here in the High School. The agent of 
the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals 
was asked by the teacher of physiology in the ' High ' 
to let her have live dogs for the purpose of experi- 
mentation at school. He refused to do it. Further 
inquiry led to the fact that there was now no vivi- 
section done, but that it had been done. The Board 
of Education assured us that it would not be allowed. 
I learned from the mother of a child in the Auburn 
High School that her son was made sick by seeing 
the blood, etc., in the operations at the school, and 


dreaded the day to come for a repetition. I heard 
that it had been practised for a good while in some 
Massachusetts schools." 

Prof. Henry C. Adams, Ph. D., University of Michigan : 

" I agree fully so far as I understand it with the 
position taken by the American Humane Associa- 
tion. When students have sufficiently advanced to 
understand the scientific problems now claiming the 
attention of the medical fraternity about psychology, 
it may be well to introduce them to vivisection ; so far 
as school children are concerned, it seems to me that 
a great wrong is being done the children themselves 
by this means of education." 

Prof. Francis E. Abbott, Cambridge, Mass. : 

" While I am not prepared to condemn all vivisec- 
tion, when conducted by scientific men for strictly 
scientific purposes and under such conditions as to 
insure a minimum of pain, I have no hesitation in 
condemning it unqualifiedly and severely, when it is 
carrried on in the presence of children, even under 
the pretence of instruction. Its tendency must be 
to brutalize them, and this is not atoned for by any 
mere increase of their knowledge. Legitimate instruc- 
tion must be in accordance with morality, and it is 
immoral to inflict pain needlessly on helpless animals. 
I deny the need of inflicting it for mere illustration 
and instruction, and can only with extreme reluctance 
sanction it for purposes of discovery that shall end in 
lessening it. 


"At a time when the need of teaching natural mor- 
ality, independent of all positive religions, is coming 
to be widely seen and felt as essential to the conduct 
of public schools supported by universal taxation, I 
consider it little short of a crime to teach children to 
be cruel, or even obtuse to the sight of suffering. 
And I sincerely applaud the American Humane Asso- 
ciation for doing what it can to prevent this crime." 
Prof. F. Tracy, Toronto University : 

" In Canada, we have no such experiments as those 
spoken of in our public schools." 

Prof. A. J. Granger, Newton High School, Mass. : 

" As a teacher I should make my answer emphatic. 
There can be no reason for such experiments in our 
public schools. I am glad you are fighting this heresy 
in modern education." 

Prof. John B. Clark, Amherst College, Amherst, 

Mass. : 

" I am entirely opposed to vivisection in any ordi- 
nary schools for children." 

Prof. Alfonse N. Van Daell, Institute of Technology, 

Boston, Mass. : 

" I believe that physiology, properly so called, 
ought not to find a place in any school below the col- 
lege grade. The elements of hygiene can and ought 
to be taught, although under present regulations the 
study, in my opinion, is begun too early. 

" 1 am not opposed to necessary experimentation 
in colleges, or schools of the same grade, but in pub- 


lie schools experimentation upon living animals is 
unnecessary or useless, with the possible exception 
of the senior classes, where something of the real 
purpose of natural science and comparative anatomy 
may, under certain circumstances, be admissible." 
George A. Bacon, of Allyn 6° Bacon, Publishers, 

Boston, Mass. : 

" To my thinking there is absolutely no excuse for 
killing animals in order to teach anatomy or physi- 
ology in our schools. In the first place the practice 
in dissection which pupils get amounts to nothing, 
and they are just as likely to come to wrong as to 
right conclusions from their observation. 

" There is certainly a distinct demoralizing effect 
produced by familiarity with these details. Any 
pupil can get from the butcher's shop a sheep's heart 
and lungs or brain, or sample of bone, muscle or 
other tissue. All these things lend interest to the 
subject ; they have no appreciable bad effect. The 
whole object of teaching these subjects in school, or 
anywhere outside of a medical college, should be 
simply hygiene. Anatomy and physiology should be 
made subordinate; adjuncts and handmaids to 

" I must confess, however, that I do not expect my 
protest or yours to have very much effect. The cry 
of the age is all for research, laboratory practice, and 
that sort of thing. Nothing is supposed to be of any 
value if learnt in the old-fashioned way. The amusing 
part of the thing, however, lies in the fact that 


investigators, unless very skilful, are far more apt to 

get wrong ideas from direct investigation, than from 


Prof. H. H. Freer, Cornell College, Mt. Vernon, Iowa : 

" It is time to call a halt upon the infliction of pain 
on animals or wantonly killing them for the purpose 
of teaching anatomy, physiology or hygiene, to young 
children. All that children need to know on these 
subjects can be taught without resorting to processes 
that will blunt the sensibilities, deprave the taste and 
brutalize the whole nature of children. 

The boy murderer, Pomeroy, was, I believe, from 
early life accustomed to the scenes of the slaughter- 
house, and his environment no doubt was responsible 
for his cruel and murderous tendencies. 

" Your agitation does not involve the general ques- 
tion of vivisection, and should receive the support of 
all humane persons." 

Prof. Ray Greene Huling, Head Master English 
High School, Cambridge, Mass. : 

" Experiments of the sort you describe may tend 
to blunt the sensibilities of children if performed in 
their presence. 

" Your questions have been carefully phrased and 
chosen. They still leave opportunity for me to say that 
I should not object to the use of oysters, sea anemones 
and similar material in the study of biology by pupils 
and teachers. ... In my present school, with 
the facilities for comparative study of animals afforded 


by the Agassiz Museum, I prefer such comparative 
study to a detailed examination of internal structure 
of familiar animals. Human physiology is illustrated 
by parts of the pig, the sheep and the ox, regularly, as 
also by the manikin, the skeleton and pictures. Dis- 
section is not practised." 

Albert M. Hilliker, Washington, D. C. : 

" In answer to the questions of your circular letter 
will say that I think such experiments as you refer to 
must necessarily blunt the sensibilities of children 
witnessing them. 

" It is very doubtful whether vivisection can be 
justified on any ground as practised by any one under 
any circumstances, and I feel sure that if ever practised 
it should be by and in the presence of specialists 

Prof, F. B. Knapp, Duxbury, Mass, : 

" I believe in having boys who are especially inter- 
ested in natural history dissect animals already dead. 
I do not believe in vivisection before even medical 
students, but I suppose it is wise for scientists to 
resort to it to a limited extent." 

John E. Kimball, late Sicperintendent Schools, New- 
ton, Mass. : 

"The practice referred to is unnecessary, painful in 
the extreme to sensitive natures, cruel and demoral- 
izing. In my experience as Superintendent of Schools 
I have heard of instances of fainting and real suffer- 


ing to susceptible children in connection with this 
very reprehensible practice. If there is one phase of 
culture outside the usual curriculum in our public 
schools which should be of constant care, it is the 
habit of uniform kindness to the lower orders of 
animate creation, and this is not consistent with a 
practice which must blunt the sensibilities of all, if it 
does not in some cases tend to develop types of 
brutality which from time to time shock society." 

Wm. F. Phelps, late Principal State Normal School, 
St. Paul, Minn., formerly Principal State Normal 
School, Trenton, New Jersey : 
" As an educator I would not allow such cruelties 

to be practised. Experiments upon living animals 

should be forbidden by statute." 

Prof. W. N. Ferris, Principal Ferris Industrial School, 

Michigan : 

" I am in sympathy with the work of your Associa- 
tion and do all in my power to advance its interests. 
I enroll about a thousand pupils every year, two- 
thirds teachers. I try to impress upon them the prin- 
ciples involved in your Association." 
Wm. J. Cox, Supermtendent of Schools, Hancock, Mich. : 

" I am heartily in favor of the good work your 
Society is doing." 

Edward S. Breck, Ph. D., Boston, Mass. : 

" Although I am in favor of vivisection under cer- 
tain very rigid restrictions (such as limitation to a 
few recognized scientific institutions), I am very much 
against that or anything like it for young people." 


. , . . " I think dissection very useful and instruc- 
tive, but it should be confined to the highest, or the 
two highest classes in the high schools ; and even 
here its moral effect on the pupils should be care- 
fully noted by the instructors and reported on." 
H. D. Lloyd, Editor " Chicago Tribune:" 

" Experiments involving infliction of pain or death 
tend to blunt, and therefore to brutalize, children in 
their human relations. 

" I do not live up to the doctrine, but I believe 
that our physical as well as sympathetic evolution is 
moving to the point at which we will be as incapable 
of killing animals for food for the body as for food 
the the mind." 
James Jeffrey Roach, Editor "Pilot" Boston, Mass.: 

"I consider the vivisection of animals for the 
ostensible instruction of children to be cruel, useless 
and demoralizing in the extreme, and that everything 
necessary for the teaching of physiology could be as 
clearly and more humanely taught by the use of illus- 
trations and manikins. . . . It is not vitally 
important that children should know all about their 
own internal organs ; it is absolutely important that 
they should be taught mercy, even to the lowest of 
living things." 

A. E. Dunning, Editor " Congregationalist : " 

"The representatives of the Congregationalist do not 
think vivisection is wise or humane when conducted 
before classes of boys and girls in the schools. In- 
deed, the matter seems to me put forcibly and truth- 
fully in the statement with which your circular closes." 


J. W. Warr, Editor "Western Ploughman:" 

" The killing of animals before children is a bar- 
barous practice that ought not to be tolerated in the 
advanced educational institutions of the nineteenth 

Rev. Samuel J. Barrows, Editor " Christian Register" 
Boston, Mass. : 

" I believe it to be a serious mistake to encourage 
children to any irresponsible use of their power over 
the lower forms of life. 

"Children should be taught that might is not 
right, and that the same laws of love, mercy and 
justice, which apply to human beings should be 
applied to the animal creation as far as possible. 

" It seems to me that it is an abuse of the name of 
education to familiarize children with the infliction 
upon animals of mortal wounds, etc., under the pre- 
tence of imparting scientific knowledge. An animal 
is not to be treated as a toy which a child is encour- 
aged to take apart just to see how it is put together. 

"The development of the spirit of love, mercy and 
justice is more important than to turn the school- 
room into a butcher's shop or a dissecting-room, to 
gratify an intellectual curiosity. 

" Physiology should have its place in school instruc- 
tion, but quite as important is the subject of ethics, 
which includes not only our duties to our fellow- 
beings, but also our duties to animals." 


Fin ley Ellingwood, M. D., Editor "Medical Times," 

Chicago, III. : 

" I am greatly in favor of physiology being taught 
children, but I can see no excuse whatever for adopt- 
ing a course advanced enough to illustrate by vivi- 
section. In the opinion of the Association I coop- 
erate most heartily." 
S. T. Pickard, Editor "Portland Tra?iscript" Portla?id, 


" I am most decidedly opposed to vivisection and 
dissection before children of public school age. 
Many grown people would be much happier if they 
knew less about the possibility of disorder in the 
organs wisely put out of sight, in order, perhaps, that 
they might be out of mind." 
Dr. H. W. Pierson, Editor "Medical Advance" 

Chicago : 

" Promiscuous vivisection is uncalled for and serves 
to gratify the baser elements in our nature, whether 
it be children or adults, and should be condemned by 
all. Individuals preparing for the special study of 
the subject of physiology will not have their finer 
senses blunted by study of the mechanism of the 
body in life. To all others this should be denied, by 
law if necessary. 

" Under sixteen years of age it is not wise to make 
children familiar with suffering of any kind. Charts 
and maps are better for the general teaching of the 
rudiments than the living subject, until the pupil is 
advanced beyond the elementary exigencies of the 


Richard Howell, Editor "Bridgeport Herald" Bridge- 
port, Conn. : 

" There are those upon whom vivisection will have 
a horrifying effect, but there are many in whom the 
practice in public schools will develop an inordinate 
love to be cruel to dumb animals. 

" The plastic mind of the public school pupil is as 
sensitive to an impression as the dry plate of a pho- 
tographer's outfit; and the impression which vivisection 
makes upon one of these young minds may develop 
frightful traits of character." 

Ernest H. Morgan, Editor " Roxbury Gazette" R ox- 
bury, Mass. : 

" I am against vivisection, even among advanced 
students, and utterly and uncompromisingly opposed 
to it among pupils in public schools." 
J. Silversmith, Editor " Occident," Chicago, III.: 

" I believe the rudiments of physiology and hygiene 
can be taught very well without resort to vivisection." 
Rev. E. B. Graham, Editor "Midland," Chicago, III. : 
" Children should not be allowed to see game shot 
by cruel sportsmen, or domestic fowls killed even for 
food, and much less should they become familiar with 
cruelty in the interests of education." 
Milton E, Smith, Editor " Church News," Washing- 
ton, D. C. : 

" I fully sympathize with any movement which tends 
to make children realize that it is ungentlemanly, 
inhuman and contrary to the spirit of civilization to 


inflict unnecessary suffering upon either man or 

Dr. M. L. Holbrook, Editor "Herald of Health : " 

" I do not think the slightest good in practice ever 
comes to children from the experiments alluded to. 
They are unnecessary. Study animals alive, acting 
naturally, and some good can be learned. Studying 
them in the throes of pain cannot help teach hygiene." 

Wm. Norton Payne, Editor "Dial" Chicago, III. : 

" In my opinion dissection has a necessary place in 
the school work, but vivisection of vertebrates should 
not be tolerated." 

J. W. Bashford, Mt. Vernon St., Boston, Mass. : 

" I believe the older children in our public schools 
would be benefited by actual knowledge of the 
structure of animals, and would gain thereby greater 
reverence for all life. But I think in general that it 
would be wise that demonstrations be upon animals 
used for food." 
Charles W. Stone, Boston, Mass. ; 

"I wish I had time to set forth at length my utter 
detestation of this outrageous perpetration in the 
name of education." 

Miss Helen C. Hawkins, Tolland, Conn. : 

" My experience as a teacher has convinced me that 
boys are apt to treat animals ungently and even 
cruelly. In most cases the thought of suffering on 
the part of the animal has never presented itself until 


it has been presented by those who have most to do 
with their early training." 

Mrs. Ednah D. Cheney, Boston, Mass. ; 

" I think it hardly wise to introduce much special 
physiological instruction into schools of the lower 
grades, unless under the care of most judicious 
teachers, which we can hardly expect all to be. In 
general, I should object to experimenting with living 
subjects, as of little use to such young pupils and 
liable to great abuse. Observations regarding the 
life and habits of animals I think more valuable, and 
this can be much encouraged." 

T, A, Abbott, Esq., St. Paul, Minn. : 

" Our St. Paul schools, although having a depart- 
ment of physiological science of the highest excel- 
lence, are opposed in theory and practice to vivi- 

Fred P. Bagley, Esq., Chicago, III. : 

" The truths of physiology can be taught as well by 
the use of illustrations and manikins as by dissection ; 
there is no necessity to resort to experiments upon 
living creatures." 
Hon. Austin V. Eastman, St. Paul, Minn. : 

" I most heartily agree with the suggestions con- 
tained in the circular, and am strenuously opposed to 
conducting experiments in public schools in the man- 
ner outined therein." 
Charles A. Hamlin, Esq., Syracuse, N. Y. : 

"All experience proves that familiarity with cruelty, 


pain, and suffering renders men increasingly indiffer- 
ent to it, and withers the sense of pity." 
Miss Alice M. Longfellow, Cambridge, Mass. : 

" It would seem to be of far greater value to lay 
stress upon the importance of observing and under- 
standing a living creature, instead of taking away the 
essential element of its beauty and interest. It seems 
to be poor humanity and poor science to think either 
is served by destruction instead of by preservation." 
Clifford W. Barnes, Chicago, III. : 

"Having studied physiology and hygiene by the use of 
illustrations and manikins,and having afterwards studied 
in a medical college and had experiments in vivisec- 
tion, I can speak with assurance when I say that no 
child in the public schools needs to resort to experi- 
mentation on living creatures in order to obtain a 
perfectly satisfactory and sufficient knowledge of the 
essentials of physiology." 
Prof. John Trowbridge, S. D., Harvard University \ 

Cambridge : 

" I have no hesitation in saying that I agree 
entirely with the position that teaching physiology by 
vivisection in public schools, is brutalizing and 

In response to the circular, replies were received 
from a large number of persons, for the most part 
expressing sympathy and accordance with the 
position of the American Humane Association on 
the question of vivisection in schools, but of 


whose valued letters considerations of space pre- 
vent more than a brief acknowledgment. In 
many cases, too, the circular was answered simply 
by monosyllables or marginal notes. To the 
following persons, therefore, the thanks of the 
American Humane Association are also due for 
responses to its circular : 

Prof. Dorman B. Eaton, New York. 

E. L. Godkin, Esq., Editor of " New York Evening 

Alfred H. Love, Preside7it American Peace Society, 

Philadelphia, Pa. 
Floyd W. Tomkins, Jr., Rector Grace Church, Provi- 
dence, R. I. 
Rev. William Brunton, Whitman, Mass. 
Rev. Dr. Henry Blanchard, Portland, Maine. 
Rev. Dr. E. M. Hickok, Sharon, Mass. 
Rev. L. Weiss, Columbus, Ohio. 
Rev. Henry Cohen, Galveston, Texas. 
Rev. Endicott Peabody, A. M., Groton School, Gro- 

ton, Mass. 
Caroline T. Haven, Working-man's School, New 

York City. 
J. Van Inwagen, Esq., Chicago, III. 
G. E. Morrow, President Agricultural Experiment 

Station, University of Illinois. 
Rt. Rev. George D. Gillespie, Bishop of Western 

Rt. Rev. Hugh Miller Thompson, Bishop of Missis- 



Rt. Rev. Jos. Blount Cheshire, Jr., Bishop of North 

Rt. Rev. Henry B. Whipple, Bishop of Minnesota. 
Rt. Rev. M. A. DeWolfe Howe, LL. D., Bishop of 

Perms ylvania. 
Rt. Rev. Thomas Bowman, Bishop M. E. Church, St. 

Louis, Mo. 
Rev. Dr. A. S. Fiske, Ithaca, N. Y. 
Rev. Dr. D. F. Bonner, Pastor Presbyterian Church, 

Florida, N. Y. 
Rev. Edward C. Hood, Wrentham, Mass. 
Rev. Austin S. Garver, Worcester, Mass. 
Rev. Dr. Egbert C. Smyth, Andover, Mass. 
Rev. Dr. C. H. Eaton, New York City. 
Rev. Paul Van Dyke, Northampton, Mass. 
Prof. William Knight, University of St. Andrew's, 

Rabbi Max Wertheirmer, Dayton, O. 
Rev. William R. Campbell, Roxbury, Mass. 
Rev. Dr. George W. Wood, Ml. Morris, N. Y. 
Rey. Dr. I. J. Lansing, Park Street Church, Boston, 

Rev. Dr. William R. Campbell, Roxbury, Mass. 
Rev. Francis M. Collier, Denver, Col. 
Rev. Daniel L. Furber, Newton Centre, Mass. 
Rev. Dewitt M. Benham, Pittsburgh, Pa. 
Rev. E. C. Ewing, Danvers, Mass. 
Rev. George Sexton, D, D., M. D., Dunkirk, N. Y. 
Rev. Dr. Joseph H. Jenckes, Indianapolis, Ind. 
Rev. Stephen Peebles, Sata?ik, Col. 
Rev. Wm. E. Barton, Shawmut Church, Boston, Mass. 


Rev. Dr. Edward Abbott, Cambridge, Mass. 

Rev. Alsop Leffingwell, Philadelphia, Pa. 

Rev. Dr. Alex. G. Wilson, Pres. Theological Sem- 
inary, Omaha. 

Rf.v. Austin B. Bassett, Ware, Mass. 

Rev. Dr. James H. Potts, Editor "Michigan Christian 
Advocate;' Detroit, Mich. 

Rev. Paul P. Frothixgham, New Bedford, Mass. 

Rev. Dr. Reese F. Alsop, Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Rev. James B. Gregg, Colorado Springs, Colo. 

Rev. C. H. Rogers, Oklahoma. 

Rev. J. Vila Blake, Chicago, III. 

Rev. T. G. Exsigx, Superintendent of the American 
Sunday School Union. 

Rev. James H. Darlixgtox, Christ Church, Bedford 
Ave., Brooklyn, N. Y. 

Rev. John P. Coyle, North Adams, Mass. 

Rev. J. M. Williams, Burlington College, Burlington, 
X. J. 

Rev. Wm. Cleveland Hicks, Jr., New York City. 

Rev. A. W. Meyer, Editor "Lutheran Guide.' 1 '' 

Rev. Dr. Epher Whitaker, Southhold, X. Y. 

Rev. Dr. James Roberts, Colwyn, Pa. 

Rev. Charles VY. Wexdte, Oakland, Col. 

Rev. A. W. Jacksox, Concord, Mass. 

Rev. Dewitt S. Clark, Chairman of High School 
Co??i?nittee, Salem, Mass. 

Rev. Dr. George F. Kexxgott, Lowell, Mass. 

Rev. William Lloyd Himes, Concord, N. H. 

Rev. Charles H. Oliphaxt, Methuen, Mass. 


Rev. T. H. M. Villiers Appleby, M. A., Archdea- 
con of Minnesota. 

Rev, Dr. Charles J. Jones, Stapleton, IV. Y. 

Rev. Thomas Duck, Ha??imondsport, N. Y. 

Prof. William Knight, University of St. Andrews, 

President George A. Gates, D. D., Iowa College, 
Grimiell, la. 

President W. H. Wilder, D. D., Illinois . Wesley an 
University, Bloomington, III. 

President Franklin Carter, Ph. D., LL. D., Wil- 
liams College, Mass. 

President William Preston Johnston, LL. D., 
Tulare University, New Orleans. 

President Julius D. Dreher, A. M., Ph. D., Roanoke 
College, Va. 

President William G. Frost, Ph. D., Berea Col- 
lege, Kentucky. 

President J. E. Rankin, D. D., LL. D., Howard 
University, Washington, D. C. 

President William A. Obenchain, A. M., Ogden 
College, Bowling Green, Ky. 

President J. B. Shearer, D. D., LL. D., Davidson 
College, Davidson, N. C. 

Governor L. Bradford Prince, LL. D., President 
University of New Mexico. 

President Daniel A. Long, D. D., LL. D,, Antioch 
College, Ohio. 

President John V. N. Standish, Ph. D., Lombard 
University, Galesburg, III. 


President James W. Kane, St. John's College, Annapo- 
lis, Md. 

Dr. Edward Berdoe, M. R. C. S., London, England. 

W. T. Stott, A. M., D. D., President Franklin Col- 
lege, Indiana. 

President J. P. Greene, William Jewell College, 

Prof. W. D. Vandiver, Presidmt State Normal 
School, Mo. 

Miss E. S. Creighton, Principal Dwight School, 
Englewood, N. J. 

Benjamin Worcester, Principal of the Waltham New 
Church School, Waltham, Mass. 

Mrs. H. C. DeMille, Principal of Henry DeMille 
School, Pamlico, N. J. 

Prof. Eugene R. Long, Arkansas College, Batesville, 

Miss M. A. Molineux, A. M., Ph. D., Newton, Mass. 

Charles E. Taylor, D. D., Forest College, N. C. 

Miss C. E. Mason, Brook Hall Seminary, Media, Pa. 

Miss Ellen W. Boyd, Principal St. Agnes School, Al- 
bany, N Y. 

T. C. Karns, Professor of Philology and Pedagogy and 
Principal of Teachers' Department, University of 
Temiessee, Knoxville, Tenn. 

President James B. Day, D. D., Syracuse University. 

President A. E. Main, Alfred, N. Y. 

Prof. B, W. Roberts, Principal Allston School, Cam- 
bridge, Mass. 

Miss Gertrude S. Bowen, Principal Bordentown 
Female College, N. J. 


W. Scott Thomas, Superintendent Public Schools, Sa?i 
Bernardino, Cat. 

Francis Coggswell, Superintendent Schools, Cam- 
bridge, Mass. 

W. B. Powell, Superintendent of Public Schools, Wash- 
ington, D. C. 

P. W. Search, Superintendent Schools, Pueblo, Col. 

Miss R. S, Rice, A. M., Principal Girls' Collegiate 
School, Chicago, III. 

Miss Sara J. Smith, Principal Woodside Seminary, 
Hartford, Conn. 

Prof. W. C. Sawyer, Ph. D., University of the Pacific, 

Prof, H. M. Willard, Howard Seminary, Mass. 

Prof. Edward A. Allen, University of Missouri. 

Rev. R. W. Chestnut, Editor " Reformed Presbyterian 
Advocate," Marissa, III. 

E, C. Linfield, Editor " Duxbury Breeze." 

George M. Whitaker, Editor " N. E. Farmer," 
Boston, Mass. 

E. H. Clement, Editor " Boston Transcript" 

James P. Magenis, Editor "Adams Freeman," Adams, 

Rev. Wm. Dallmann, Editor " Lutheran Witness," 
Baltimore, Md. 

R, H. Carothers, Editor " Educational Courant," 
Loicisville, Ky. 

J. M. Dewbery, Editor " Educational Exchange," Mont- 
gomery, Ala. 

W. J. Chalmers, Chicago, III. 

Maria H. Blanding, Girls' High School, Brooklyn, N. Y. 


Miss Maria L. Owen, Ex-President Springfield Women's 
Club, Springfield, Mass. 

Miss 'E. E. Constance Jones, Girton College, Cam- 
bridge, England. 

Miss Rowena A. Pollard, Georgetown, Ky. 

Grace A. Oliver, Marblehead, Mass. 

Miss Stella Dyer Loring, Prairie Ave., Chicago, III. 

Dean L. B. R. Briggs ? Harvard University, Cambridge. 

Wm. C. Collor, Keene Valley, N. Y. 

J. W. Plummer, Chicago, III. 

E. N. L, Walton, West Newton, Mass. 
Charles C. Pickett, Esq., Chicago, III. 
H. R. Arndt, M. D., San Diego, Cal. 
George Sadler, M. D., Ravenna, Ohio. 
Christopher Roberts, Esq., Newark, N. /. 
L. F. Ives, Esq., Detroit, Mich. 

Calvin M. Clark, Haverhill, Mass. 

Marion Lawrence, General Secretary, Ohio Sunday 

School Association, Toledo, Ohio. 
Otto Reiner. Esq., Brooklyn, N. Y. 
C. B. Grant, Esq., Houghton, Mich. 
T. Griswold Comstock, M. D., St. Louis, Mo. 

F. Wilson Hurd, M. D., Mmsi, Pennsylvania. 
Ada H. Kepley, Attomey-at-Law. 

Hon. John Turner Wait, Norwich, Conn. 

All of which is respectfully submitted. 
Francis H. Rowley, 
Albert Leffingwell, M. D., 



This book is due on the date indicated below, or at the 
expiration of a definite period after the date of borrowing, 
as provided by the rules of the Library or by special ar- 
rangement with the Librarian in charge. 








eec tion in schools tl0n aDd dis ' 
1Q>frt ^ „-